You're crowing about going 8 games we did 14 where's your achievement? Another 30 minutes cd special?
I fail to see where totsfan was crowing - he merely stated a fact - we did beat you in the game before last. With your squad it's not an achievement to go 14 unbeaten - it's expected.
It's always an achievement to beat Chelsea and not many do it but in my book 14 is better than 8 but I ain't crowing about it either!
Don't start all that. You don't exactly have a cheap squad yourselves though do you? With a squad that cost a fair bit more than £200M to assemble, you should be doing a lot better than you are.
Laughable claim. For a start, there are various clubs both above and below us that have more expensive squads. Then there's the obvious disparity in wages, which everyone seems to ignore, for some reason. We're still in all the cups that we started in and we're 5th in the league. What should we be doing that we're not?
Probably. However, there is a world of difference between the cost of our squad, and Chavski's. So, the point is valid.
You shouldn't be boasting bout an 8 game unbeaten run with a £200M squad thats all. It's not an achievement. It should be expected.
The only club out of those above us that you could claim are out of place based on squad cost is Saints who are doing very well. Arsenal and Liverpool should be above us if we follow your logic. So therefore 5th or 6th is about right wouldn't you say?
Spurs' net spend over the past 5 seasons has been roughly -£22m. West Ham's is about £90m. By your own standards you should be absolutely miles ahead of us, shouldn't you?
He's only on here Wumming away as his pokey little club is actually doing more than its usual yo-yo act between the Prem and the Championship. Pretty soon, the porn merchant and his two idiot sons will Twatter once too often about Fat Sam. He'll leave - they'll be back where they came from!
Out of the woodwork come the yah boo sucks brigade which makes me appreciate being a Spurs supporter. Whiny voice; My clubs better than yours! I'm sure it is! Now off you go.
Even though your figures are wrong, your point is invalid. Your squad cost over £200m to assemble. Ours cost around £70M. And you are a whole POINT ahead of us.
Good points. As to the Stambouli and Kane calls: I thought I saw them clearly. I could be wrong. But if we’re still debating after after viewing superslowmotion replays,it’s obvious replay technology is needed--and that the refusal to use it amounts to de facto match, or more properly, season fixing. I couldn’t agree more that the degree to which Taylor lost all objectivity was perfectly illustrated by the Rose tackle. That led to a general boiling over. Taylor should be sacked. Having said all that, at some level I’m pleased that Palace’s fans got the good result their support deserved.
Why are my figures wrong? We have a net gain on transfers and you've had a large net spend. Our squad cost more than yours because we sell people on for good money and have to replace them. That simply doesn't happen to West Ham any more. We're a point ahead of you and in two cups more than you. We've played more games than anyone else in the league and it's showing.
The net spend figures over the last 5 years are distorted by the fact we've been relegated and promoted in that time. Also by the fact you had very much a 'one off' profit with Bale (money you invested wisely I must say ). The net spend of the two clubs during the premier league era or even since the turn of the millenium will give a much fairer picture of who the big spenders are usually. Regardless of where the money came from, the fact remains that you have a squad which cost triple what ours did. If you are happy with your achievements so far this season then good for you. I would like to think that if we spent another £140M on our squad though, we would be doing considerably better than you are now.
